Reply With Quote
Good news.
Unemployment rate dropped to 8.6 percent in Nov., now stands at its lowest level since March 2009:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/69613.html
In a surprising development, the unemployment rate dropped to a stunning 8.6 percent in November, as the country’s economy flashed signs of strength amid uneasiness about a broader global downturn.
The unemployment rate drop from 9 percent in October occurred even though the Labor Department reported Friday that just 120,000 jobs were added in November, a figure roughly in line with expectations.
Unemployment now stands at its lowest level since March 2009.
In addition, revisions made by the Labor Department to past month on Friday showing that an additional 92,000 jobs were added in October and September suggest the economy was much stronger than initially believed.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) was nonplussed by the drop, saying the possibility of tax hikes has held back the recovery.
“During the holidays, it’s always comforting to see an uptick in seasonal hiring, but far too many people still remain out of work and the economy still faces systemic problems,” he said in a statement. “Unemployment has remained high and economic uncertainty has prevailed because of the constant threat of tax increases from Washington Democrats and the Obama Administration.”
This trends needs to continue to get this Country moving again. Yes we can.
Good news.
Is 120,000 hires enough to move the needle four-tenths of a point all by itself?
The OP is a little short on analysis.
Better analysis here.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/45521793
So, I probably should temper my exhuberance somewhat.The rate fell from the previous month's 9.0 percent, a move which in part reflected a drop in those looking for jobs. The participation rate dropped to 64 percent, from 64.2 percent in October.
Does anyone REALLY have any faith in those employment stats? It seems like they just make some phone calls and then just pull a number out of their ass...
And the fact that they can say..."well, we don't count them as unemployed anymore because they have completely given up looking for work"...is total bull .
I wouldn't go that far. Yeah, there's a degree of subjectiveness to it, especially with determing when someone crosses over the unemployed to no-longer-looking line. But the stats are still useful.
The participation rate seems like a number that would be harder to fudge.
From another article...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...y-120-000.htmlUnemployment Rate
Revisions to prior reports added a total of 72,000 jobs to payrolls in September and October.
The unemployment rate, derived from a separate survey of households, was forecast to hold at 9 percent. The decrease in the jobless rate reflected a 278,000 gain in employment at the same time 315,000 Americans left the labor force.
“You’d like to see the unemployment rate coming down when people are coming into the job market, not disappearing,” James Glassman, senior economist at JP Morgan Chase & Co. in New York, said in an interview on “Bloomberg Surveillance” with Tom Keene. “That’s probably exaggerating the trend in unemployment.”
you had faith when the #s were double digits
where is your faith now?
that niga
expect more of the "I quit looking" unemployed to sign up again, and push the badly understated /dishonest number back up.
And what about the people that are finding jobs at 1/3 to 1/2 or less of their previous salary?
and people working "employed" part time who want/NEED full time?
and there are probably still 4 or 5 job seekers for jobs offered.
The Repugs' pro-cyclic deficit cutting/stimulus blocking efforts will certainly intensify and multiply at state/federal levels to keep the rate as high as they can for Nov 2012.
You are such a stupid ass. I have consistently said the numbers are bogus. Real unemployment/underemployment is closer to 18% than 9%.you had faith when the #s were double digits
where is your faith now?
which means what? that would mean even the real unemployment under Reagan, was around 20%. should he have been impeached too
if you accuse Obama's admin job #s to be BS , then all admins must have had BS #s to start with
which makes you a stupid ass
I'm just stating facts dummy.which means what? that would mean even the real unemployment under Reagan, was around 20%. should he have been impeached too
if you accuse Obama's admin job #s to be BS , then all admins must have had BS #s to start with
which makes you a stupid ass
So you HONESTLY believe that only 8.8% of the people in the US are unemployed or underemployed?
so you honestly believe that only 10% of the people in the US were unenployed or underemployed under Reagan?
You can cram your straw man right up your ass.so you honestly believe that only 10% of the people in the US were unenployed or underemployed under Reagan?
Was excited about the number until I heard the facts behind it; I work in a business that people hiring means increased revenue for me - without having to add clients.
Still, good news, especially if it gets spun that way. Add to that decreased debt of Americans, and a pretty good start to the holiday shopping season.....get that consumer confidence up, and the engine starts building some momentum.
so can you
Oh, and if the good numbers mean 4 more years of Obama, and we don't get any of the rehashed has been politicians the Republicans are trotting up as the "conservative" alternative?
So be it.
Labor Force's Share Of Income Plunges To Lowest Recorded Level
The labor force's share of income has plunged to its lowest level since the measure was first recorded.
The labor force's share of income -- or the percentage of national income -- fell to a nearly 60-year-low last quarter, according to data from the Federal Reserve bank of St. Louis. The share dropped to 57.1 percent, according to economist Nouriel Roubini, compared to an average of nearly 65 percent percent before the year 2000.
The low-level of national income that the labor force is taking home signals that though employers may be experiencing a growth in productivity, the rise in income is going towards company profits, not workers. The figures are just one measure indicating that income inequality is on the rise. The top one percent of earners saw their incomes grow by 275 percent between 1979 and 2009, according to the Congressional Budget Office, while the bottom fifth of earners experienced a 20 percent rise in income during the same period.
And though the economy is technically in recovery, that doesn't mean Americans' wallets are seeing a boost. The U.S. median income dropped in 2010 for the second year in a row to $26,364. Meanwhile, millionaires control nearly 40 percent of global wealth, according to an October report from Credit Suisse.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1...n_1124189.html
====
Combined with corporate profits and cash-on-hand at record or near-record levels, easy to see how the VRWC war on employees is essentially over. Human-Americans are ed and un able, OWS won't elect enough, if anybody at all, to even try to un H-As.
Americans to lose $34.3 billion in lost vacation
U.S. workers are set to lose 226 million vacation days this year, and according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data, it equates to about $34.3 billion
CNN cites a survey that found many American workers are increasingly weary of asking their bosses for a vacation these days.
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/clockin...lost-vacation/
Overworked, Older Americans Not Using Up Allotted Vacation Days
By year's end, the average American worker will have ac ulated more than a week's worth of unused vacation days.
According to a recent American Travel Behavior Survey, commissioned by the discount travel website Hotwire.com, older Americans tend to have a disproportionate share of unused vacation time.
In particular, for workers ages 55 and older, the survey found that nearly 30 percent have between five and 10 vacation days left over at the end of each year. Further, it found that only a quarter of workers 55 and older had used up all of their allotted vacation time by year's end.
"For some people, when they're present and working, they think they're showing their boss their value," Avramidis said. "They fear that when they're on vacation, their manager will see that the company not only does fine without them, but that they might eliminate their position as a result."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1...n_1110095.html
Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-02-2011 at 12:39 PM.
Seasonal Employment may also have something to do with it
Thanks, CG.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
